Class Actions

The Firm is among the most experienced class action litigation firms in San Diego. We have handled many state and federal class action matters, Business and Professions Code section 17200 matters, and multi-district litigation. Our experience in this area covers almost the entire spectrum of our practice areas including antitrust/unfair competition, false advertising, banking, securities fraud, product liability, and employment wage and hour litigation.

• The Firm represented a national banking organization in defense of numerous class action cases consolidated under the heading In Re Structured Settlement Litigation brought by numerous beneficiaries and payees of personal injury structured settlements against numerous financial institutions. Plaintiffs in these consolidated cases sought hundreds of millions of dollars in damages caused by the alleged waste and diversion of the proceeds of their settlements by various trustors, trustees and investment advisors.
• The Firm represented a national banking organization in class action litigation pending in the United States District Court, Central District of California (known as the First Alliance Litigation), in which a certified class sought substantial monetary damages as well as equitable relief against numerous lenders and others for alleged "predatory lending" practices. This matter was satisfactorily resolved without any payment by our client.
• The Firm represented national banking entities in a series of lawsuits filed in connection with the failure of Pioneer Mortgage Company in San Diego. The combined actions involved approximately 2,500 investors who had invested in excess of $200 million in Pioneer Mortgage Company and received in return various interests in fractionalized notes and deeds of trust and collateralized mortgage obligations. When Pioneer filed for bankruptcy, investors sued the defendant financial institutions, accountants, title insurers and related parties to recover losses, asserting violations of state and federal securities laws, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, aiding and abetting, and conspiracy to commit the same. We tried seven consolidated test cases selected from a total of approximately 870 state court cases filed by the Pioneer investors. That four-month trial resulted in a jury verdict in our client's favor.
• The Firm represented a national grocery chain in defense of a certified consumer class action lawsuit brought against the three largest grocery retailers in Southern California for allegedly conspiring to fix the retail price of eggs. The Complaint alleged violations of California anti-trust and unfair competition laws. After an eight-week jury trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of our client and its co-defendants.
• The Firm represented a national oil company in defense of a class action gasoline price fixing litigation filed on behalf of 22 million California drivers. The Plaintiffs alleged that the nine oil company Defendants, that sold state-mandated cleaner burning gasoline in the State of California, conspired to fix the price and restrict the supply of gasoline. Just prior to trial, the trial court granted our motion for summary judgment, but later granted Plaintiffs’ motion for new trial. The Fourth District Court of Appeal filed a 118-page opinion affirming the summary judgment for our client and reversing the new trial order. Subsequently, the California Supreme Court, in what is now the leading case on burden-shifting under California Code of Civil Procedure § 437(c), affirmed the Fourth District Court of Appeal’s opinion in Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Company, et al., 25 Cal. 4th 826, 107 Cal. Rptr. 2nd 841 (2001).
• The Firm was co-counsel with a national law firm for a national publisher in defense of a nationwide class action brought by a class of school districts claiming damages for violations of Section 2 of the Sherman Act (attempt to monopolize in the market) based on the provision of magazine subscription fund-raising services. After extensive discovery and motion proceedings, a complex court approved settlement was reached.
• The Firm was lead trial counsel for a certified class of purchasers of a dietary supplemental (Xenadrine RFA-1), which action was brought for restitution and other remedies under California Business & Professions Code section 17200. At the conclusion of the approximately seven-week, non-jury trial, the trial judge found in favor of our client in all respects and awarded restitution of $12 million, in addition to substantial injunctive relief.
• The Firm, along with a national law firm, represented a national corporation in defense of a nationwide class action that involved claims by now "adult" children and their parents for injuries sustained in 1978 from consuming chloride-deficient infant formula. We were able to defeat class certification. The individual claims were thereafter satisfactorily settled.
• Along with our co-counsel, a national law firm, we represented a national psychiatric organization in a class action, in which the plaintiffs asserted that the organization conspired to increase the diagnoses of Attention Deficient Disorder (ADD) in children in order to increase the sale of the prescription drug Ritalin. Plaintiffs contended that the organization's role in the alleged conspiracy was the listing of the diagnostic criteria for ADD contained in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders ("DSM"). We filed an anti-SLAPP motion and motion to dismiss which were granted by the federal district court and attorneys fees were awarded to our client. The case was appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which affirmed the dismissal, and the award of attorneys fees to our client under California’s anti-SLAPP statute.